Florida Building Commission

August 22, 2014

Legal Report

Tradewinds Island Grand

5500 Gulf Boulevard

St. Pete Beach,

Florida

PLUMBING TAC

DS2014-066 by Edward Rojas of the City of Doral As modified by TAC

Question: When classifying an Assembly use as a Business according to the 2010 Florida Building Code, Building, Chapter 3, section 303.1 exception 1. Does the 2010 Florida Building Code, Plumbing, chapter 4, section 403.2, Separate Facilities, Exception 3 also apply?

Answer: Yes. The project in question (i.e. business occupancy with floor area of 1,711 Square feet and occupant load of less than 50 persons) would fall within the scope of Section 403.2, Exception 3 of the 2010 Florida Building Code, Plumbing.

ELECTRICAL TAC, ENERGY TAC

DS-2014-075 by Sprague Owings of Marion County As modified by TAC

Question 1: Does the use of a mini-split or other equipment that is listed as an A/C unit or heat pump that has a dehumidification mode and a promised to only run in the dehumidication mode exempt the reclassification of a Category I, II, or III sunroom to a IV or V?

Answer: The answer is No.  As per sections R301.2.1.1.2 of the 2010 Florida Building Code, Residential, a mini split system that could provide cooling or heating to the sunroom would place the room in category IV or V, depending on thermal isolation or lack thereof from the primary structure.  All applicable code requirements would apply.  To be exempt, the unit must comply with Section 101.4.8.5(5) of the 2010 Florida Building Code, Energy Conservation.

Question 2: Does a dehumidification mode and signed affidavit to only run the unit in dehumification mode circumvent the listing & labeling intent and circumvent all other application code requirement.

Answer: See answer to question #1.

FIRE TAC

DS 2014-083 by Eric Neilinger of Fire Alarm Systems and Security Inc.

Question 1: Does a UL listed integrated Fire alarm and smoke control system meet the intent of 909.12?

Answer:  Answer is not possible.  The Commission has no authority to determine whether a listed system meets the intent of the Code. In fact, determination of whether a listed product meets code is subject to the design of the engineer of record and the review and approval by the local authority having jurisdiction.  

Question: 2)   Do we have to separate the one integrated system into two separate control panels?

Answer:    Yes, as per 909.16 of the FBC, Building, separate control panels are required.  However, as per section 909.16.2 of the FBC, Building, an integrated system is permitted as designed by the engineer of record and approved by the local authority having jurisdiction.

Question 3)   As a minimum code compliant system does 909 require the Fire Fighter smoke control panel to be a separate graphic display panel?

Answer: Answer is not possible; the term “graphic display” is not utilized in Section 909.16. Determination of whether a product meets code is subject to the design of the engineer of record and review and approval from the local building authority having jurisdiction.

Question 4) To meet minimum code compliance will the installation of a UL listed integrated Fire Alarm and Smoke Control system that meets all the elements of 909.16 meet the intent of 909 for a Fire Fighter smoke control panel?

Answer: No, as per 909.16 of the FBC, Building, and separate control panels are required. However, as per section 909.16.2 of the FBC, Building, an integrated system is permitted as designed by the engineer of record and approved by the local authority having jurisdiction.

Note: The TAC voted to approve staff analysis & also supported a motion to dismiss the DEC Statement based on comments made by Petitioner during the meeting.

PLUMBING TAC

DS 2014-084 by Gary Kozan of Ridgeway Plumbing Inc.

Question: The issue is whether a water heater that is installed in a garage, but at the same elevation as the interior finished floor, is required to have a pan.

Answer: No. As per Chapter 2, Definition of “Habitable Space”. A garage is not habitable space and no pan is required even if the heater is installed at the same elevation as the finished floor of the structure.

STRUCTURAL TAC, PRODUCT APPROVAL POC

DS2014-086 by Joe Hetzel of DASMA  

Question 1: If a vent is installed in the door, is the state approval still valid if the approval does not include allowance for a vent?

Answer: No, installation of the vent in the door in question is considered modification to the said approval. The state approval would not be valid because the product was approved based on specific testing and evaluation/limitation of use which did not include the allowance for a vent.  However, modifications to the product in question can be made per F.S. 553.8425 (3), if such modifications are acceptable to the building official and substantiated through sufficient evidence submitted to the local building official to demonstrate compliance with the code or the intent of the code, including such evidence as certifications from a Florida registered architect or Florida professional engineer.

Question 2: Is there any difference in the answer to #1 above for a door involving a vent for flood control versus a vent for air ventilation?

Answer: No. Also, see answer to question #1

Question 3: Does the size of the vent itself make a difference in the answer to Question #1?

Answer: No. Also, see answer to question #1.

CODE ADMINISTRATION TAC

DS2013-089 petitioned by T.A. Krebs, Architect, T.A. Krebs, LLC.

Question: Is the applicant for a single family residence remodeling/addition, not undergoing a change of occupancy, complying with FBC-Residential required to demonstrate compliance with an FBC-Existing Building compliance method selected by the Building Official?

Answer: With the understanding that as per Section 101.5 of the Florida Building Code (FBC), Existing Building, selection of the appropriate method of compliance for the project in question is subject to the discretion of the applicant and not the building official; the answer to the question is “No”. As per Sections 302.1 and 303.1 of the 2010 Florida Building Code, Existing Building, compliance of the project in question with the 2010 FBC-Residential is an acceptable alternative for demonstrating compliance with the 2010 FBC, Existing Building.